Mikael Åkerfeldt On Illegal File-Sharing And Downloading
Band Photo: Opeth (?)
UK's Metal Hammer magazine recently conducted an interview with Opeth frontman Mikael Åkerfeldt. Excerpts follow:
MH: Your label, Roadrunner, has been criticized for the number of reissues it releases, including your last album, "Ghost Reveries". Do you think that's fair?
Mikael: I think most labels do that today. The record industry is not doing that well; the companies are grasping at straws to try and make money, and perhaps that's the way to do it. I don't care how many reissues of our albums they put out — they could put out a thousand reissues and I couldn't care less, as long as the quality is good. You don't have to buy these things if you don't want to. Personally, I don't buy clothes and I don't go out drinking, I just buy records — so I don't have a problem with buying 20 different versions of my favorite album.
MH: "Ghost Reveries" was leaked via the Internet before its release in 2005. Does illegal file sharing piss you off?
Mikael: It does piss me off. The main problem for me is that the magic gets lost. When you're downloading, you don't have the artwork, you don't have anything but the tunes, and in bad quality. It bothers me, because the ideal situation for me would be to gather up 5,000 fans every day and give them the record and we could listen to it together, although that's not possible. My music is sacred to me, and I don't want it to be presented in any form other than the ones we have approved.
MH: Opeth's drummer Martin Lopez left the band in 2006 and guitarist Peter Lindgren followed a few months ago. Is the new lineup stable now?
Mikael: Well, you never know! But the overall vibe in the band now is really good. We've been hanging out getting to know each other, and it's good because everybody in the band just wants to play music. That's always been the most important thing with this band; I want everyone to be a musician, and fuck the other things. It's so easy to be carried away with this type of business. There's a lot of other things that are cool to do, but that shouldn't take away from the importance of the music, and if you don't have the music anymore, you're nothing. That was the problem with both Lopez and Peter; that's why they left. Because they probably didn't burn as much. It's not easy to be in a touring band like this one; it's tough. The guys in the band, they write and play music in their spare time, and there's no question about anything else.
Source: Blabbermouth
What's Next?
- Previous Article:
RATM Big Day Out Performance Turns Violent - Next Article:
AC/DC Frontman Helps Out Young Band
13 Comments on "Mikael Åkerfeldt On Illegal File-Sharing"
Member
4. writes:
I agree that it's good quality. Good enough that the audible difference between CD quality and 192 Kbps is negligible. I was astounded to find out that the standard bitrate for recorded digital CD sound is 1411Kbps. Around 10Mb per minute of music. (!) I agree with Mikael that the entire package is what the artist wants you to absorb. Regardless, I have downloaded multiple albums that I play the sh*t out of on my computer, and eventually bought cd copies of so I can listen to them on my home stereo and in my car. Full circle. Download preview, and then purchase.
5. writes:
I use ITUNES regularly and the tracks that I buy always sound amazing...like the actual cd. I download legally.... I used to buy albums - but I hate to have to wait 3-5 days for delivery. Itunes could have a better selection of rock and metal, but that is a different thought entirely. Yes - I do the same thing, download the music if you enjoy it - then go buy the album or set of tracks online.
6. writes:
Exactly, there is a bit of a difference with 192 compared to WAV or AIFF format which is 1411, but mostly in volume and slightly in fidelity. I sometimes bump up my bit rates to 320 to rectify that issue further for the music is really enjoy. AND I still will go buy my favourite artist's albums, usually the day they come out, or download pre-released singles from iTunes, because I either want to support the band, obtain the real artwork or to simply get an even better quality version by just ripping the album myself. I also, will NOT post those rips for sharing on file networks. But it's unavoidable. Portable digital music players are key to have for most people, and CD's are quickly becoming a passe format that not only takes up physical space but also contributes to carbon emissions. I really urge artists & labels to embrace digital format by offering high quality digital versions in multiple quality rates (ie. 192, 224, 320, etc. Nothing below 160! That is where the quality really suffers!). They could also include PDF &/or JPG format artwork as part of the download package with the album. This should be industry standard. There will still be fans interested in obtaining CD formats, just like those of us who still buy vinyl. There should really be no worry about losing the CD audio format in music. People who have the money to invest in full Home Stereo systems will vouch for that. It is still the highest quality audio format out there.
Imagine walking into a Music retailer with you iPod or what-have-you, paying for an album, and then connecting your device to one of their many computers, and downloading the album in high quality straight to your player! Or simply picking up a Flash drive (or your own) with what you've ordered at the location and going home and adding that to your digital collection! In my dreams, I guess. Not to mention, you should be able to do all this without leaving the house in the first place, online stores? anybody? f***, even artists could do this entirely on their own. :P
Back to leaks, if anyone distributes any sort of advance copy, that will almost always leak onto the web. I've heard of some labels adding some sort of tracking software onto advance copies with some sort of code that tracks who obtained and made a copy of that item, but it almost seems like Propagandha-talk to me. But still, Leaks (although they ruin the surprise) give the true fans what they've been salivating over in anticipation for months, and to me, do nothing to take away from the integrity of the art. These leaks, in turn, will translate to; a) album sales (like myself), b) Concert sales (like myself), c) Merchandise sales (like Myself), d)NEW FANS!! and e)Content Music-lovers & Connaisseurs a-like (like myself;) PS. the album art is on Wiki & Amazon (ssshhh! don't tell Mike)
Supporter
8. writes:
My god! You guys sound like my father does when he talks about work. He is a test engenerring manager at Intel and speaks a whole diffrent language. I do love my c.ds, but do like to hear what I buy first. Just so I dont get home pop in the album and get angry I paid for a giant p.o.s!
9. writes:
The thing with quality standards is that not everyone notices them, especially if you are used to mp3 quality. Say that all you listen to are mp3's on your ipod wearing headphones and you listen to CDs while in your car driving. You aren't going to notice any sort discernible fidelity issues because you aren't listening to each in the same environment or standards. I don't own an mp3 player because I don't like to personally listen to lossy quality music and most don't support FLAC or other lossless codecs. Plus, most the of the CDs that I am going to want are not going to be made available in a lossless format anyhow. As for the issue of not being able to tell the difference between a 192kbps mp3 and a CD or uncompressed WAV; you are right. You really won't notice any difference if you are playing them on low quality computer speakers if you don't have the CD to compare it to. How can you possibly compare an mp3 to a CD if you (I'm assuming) don't own the actual CD? That's making a judgment between two items but not having one of them to judge. There are huge differences in quality between the two formats so much so to me that I will go and buy the physical CD of something I have downloaded if I feel it is worth listening to. There are always exceptions of course, like downloading a CD realizing it sucks and then having not wasted your hard earned money on a POS.
10. writes:
Another plus of free downloading... Filtering out the crap! You can actually buy something worth buying instead of just picking up an album based on a Band's reputation or what someone may have said about them. Kinda makes you nervous though as an artist. Who really decides what sucks and what doesn't? Something that may be terrible and irrelevant to one person, may be godly & utterly original to another. It's all about perception. Most people, unfortunately, follow the so-called "public perception" instead of their own.
Supporter
To minimize comment spam/abuse, you cannot post comments on articles over a month old.
1. riseNd3stroy writes:
I'm ready for some new Opeth...